Talk:Benjaman Kyle: Difference between revisions
Line 99: | Line 99: | ||
Skepticism: |
Skepticism: |
||
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?99607-Benjaman-Kyle-Statement-from-Owner-of-Websleuths-com <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Mrrayemond|Mrrayemond]] ([[User talk:Mrrayemond|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Mrrayemond|contribs]]) 06:34, 13 October 2014 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?99607-Benjaman-Kyle-Statement-from-Owner-of-Websleuths-com <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Mrrayemond|Mrrayemond]] ([[User talk:Mrrayemond|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Mrrayemond|contribs]]) 06:34, 13 October 2014 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
::We covered that already. Since websleuth won't release the evidence to backup their claims, the consensus is that they should be ignored. In reality, it is highly unlikely that amateur detectives can find something the police, FBI, and other agencies could not. --[[Special:Contributions/207.215.78.126|207.215.78.126]] ([[User talk:207.215.78.126|talk]]) 19:41, 14 April 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:41, 14 April 2015
Biography Start‑class | |||||||
|
This article was nominated for deletion on 6 January 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
Please Don't Delete
Ok, thanks, I see that I cannot have the FBI contact on here, nor the man's vital/personal statistics. This isn't a case for the study of amnesia so much as it is an attempt to help the man find his identity. Guess that can't really happen here. Sad. I won't bother to try and replace the valuable info again.
Snowme (talk) 07:59, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Just leave it where it is, no harm is done and there is a small chance this guys family will discover this page, just let it be for crying out loud. anonymous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.148.59.169 (talk) 23:37, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Hear hear. There are plenty of far less interesting or relevant personal biographies on Wikipedia. Why not give this one a chance for a while longer? Uyvsdi (talk) 23:44, 6 January 2009 (UTC)Uyvsdi
Hi Wiki people! I just stumbled across this page and found it very interesting. Please keep it. 64.95.190.180 (talk) 03:57, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
No kidding. Honestly, i found it interesting to read about, and the dude HAS been featured. Being found naked behind a Burger King confers at least a little "notability" in my book. 72.63.191.203 (talk) 23:49, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
I don't see how the notability is in question as he was featured on national television. --24.22.118.108 (talk) 00:38, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
This was an intriguing and important article. Please don't delete! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.193.211.18 (talk) 15:00, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Don't delete.Theplanetsaturn (talk) 00:41, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Who ever proposed that it be deleted is a douche! there is every chance someone could stumple upon this page and be able to identify him.62.30.54.79 (talk) 00:53, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Why is this up for deletion? Its a biography of a man who has notability. I'm sure there are far less interesting articles on Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.228.252.113 (talk) 00:54, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
There is something sadly ironic about the proposed deletion of this page. It's like if there was a conspiracy to insure everyone forget about this guy. So sad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.152.90.126 (talk) 01:34, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Keep this. This is an example of deletionism at its worst, as if whoever nominated it for such wishes to delete this man as well. 96.33.85.197 (talk) 02:01, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Delete AFTER someone sets up a freebie "identify the amnesiac" web service. Which is kind of what's needed, because the guy's family isn't ever going to think to try to find him by looking for "Benjaman Kyle" in wikipedia. Although on the other hand, who'd think to look for long-lost relatives by looking through photos of people who suffer amnesia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.157.119.66 (talk) 02:14, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
NOTE - This is the talk page for discussing changes to the article, not the Articles for Deletion discussion. The link to that discussion can be found on the top of the article. (ESkog)(Talk) 18:43, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
I would like to request a Benjamin Kyle disambiguation page. I was hoping to find this article, to see if Mr. Kyle had found his family, when I ended up on a page talking about Benjamin Kyle from Babylon Five. I was unaware there was more than one spelling of Benjamin. I have no idea how those disambiguation pages are created, and hope someone who knows how to do it would be willing to help. Thanks Squirthose (talk) 15:42, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Burger King viral marketing
Delete this spam. 217.132.25.121 (talk) 11:08, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- This is obviously not spam. Don't be ridiculous. --207.215.78.126 (talk) 19:36, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
What the hell?!?!?!
This reads more like a missing person's profile and less like a Wikipedia article! Check this out:
Appearance
Kyle is caucasian and appears to be in his 50s or 60s. He has a passing resemblance to actor Chevy Chase, and journalist Anderson Cooper. Benjaman appears to be of above average intelligence. He is 5 feet 11 inches (1.8 m) tall and weighs 240 pounds (110 kg).He has graying hair with a receding hairline, and blue-green eyes.
Not encyclopedic at all!--Crackthewhip775 (talk) 02:38, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
I don't think it should be deleted, but maybe the article should be changed to sound less 'missing persons page', however that could be done. He is a true modern day mystery and it's amazing how he has still not been identified in this day and age, after having appeared on well-known tv shows, and in magazines and newspapers all over the world, and he is being discussed in so many places on the internet. I think this case is incredibly fascinating. It just doesn't fit in with our information society.
Picture
If this article is to remain it seems imperative that it have a photograph of the man. The last paragraph even mentions one of his hopes for figuring out who he is is by someone recognizing him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.31.157.177 (talk) 12:28, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Otrs permission for image pending
I just got the permission request from the main website for the image, so don't do anything to the image until we hear back from otrs. --Kolrobie (talk) 07:55, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Missing person profile
As noted almost two years ago, this article sounds more like a missing person's profile than an encyclopedia article. Could some knowledgeable editors help by making suggestions or edits for improving the article? ProGene (talk) 17:47, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
Fraud Allegation
Amateur detective website Websleuth.com said they investigated and are convinced the man is a fraud (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=99607). Should this be included? My problem is that they refuse to release their evidence for scrutiny. From the comments I read, they claim their conclusion is based on their secret evidence that shows he was never hit over the head and therefore cannot have amnesia, which from what I read, is not required for amnesia anyway. What does everybody else think? 207.215.78.126 (talk) 17:53, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
- Junk comments - theirs not yours. "Secret evidence"? Evidence is evidence only if it is verifiable.reddogsix (talk) 18:01, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
- I concur. Secret evidence that can't be released for independent verification is not evidence. Also, they seem to be using faulty reasoning stemming from a misunderstanding of actual amnesia.
- Or perhaps it's just a scam. This would be unremarkable for a homeless person who grew up with no family and living off the grid his whole life. Occam's razor applies. 50.36.11.66 (talk) 14:51, 29 December 2012 (UTC)JoseCalabro
- And able to dodge investigation by the FBI? No, I doubt this is a scam.
- Dr. Phil had on "Benjaman Kyle" back ca. 2008 - 2009. I know for a fact Dr. Phil wouldn't have offered up the story of this man's brutal attack and mugging followed by his struggles with amnesia and not knowing who he was, without having his team of private detectives and other investigative snoops go through "Benjaman Kyle"'s back story with a fine tooth comb. Or, Dr. Phil would've had Benjaman on but only to confront him with his deceit. Dr. Phil may be a bombastic, irritating, crass lower midwestern hick with an unpleasant personal life, but he also HATES being made to look like a fool. I am certain he contacted the Burger King restaurant managers at the location Benjaman was abandoned at, to verify that they found him beaten to unconsciousness, sunburned, and completely nude. I'm sure he got to talk to the woman manager whose voice can be heard on the actual 911 call (which he probably got to hear for himself), screaming and pleading with the dispatcher because she said he looked close to death. I'm sure he got to talk to all the FBI investigators who determined this man was no criminal or fraudster based on the in-depth work they did to try to figure out who Benjaman was. So if Dr. Phil seemed to take Benjaman at face value, so should everyone else. BTW, I was fascinated to find out that when Benjaman was able to return to Indianapolis for a visit, he found himself recognizing not just old sights but the native accent, and how this concurs with what a professional linguist said about his accent (that it was probably one that originated in Indiana). 68.89.129.46 (talk) 06:49, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
More info - should some of this be included?
Schizophrenia diagnosis: http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2010/jul/10/man-with-no-memory-america
Skepticism: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?99607-Benjaman-Kyle-Statement-from-Owner-of-Websleuths-com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrrayemond (talk • contribs) 06:34, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
- We covered that already. Since websleuth won't release the evidence to backup their claims, the consensus is that they should be ignored. In reality, it is highly unlikely that amateur detectives can find something the police, FBI, and other agencies could not. --207.215.78.126 (talk) 19:41, 14 April 2015 (UTC)